PDA

View Full Version : Banks doing it again!



Qtec
06-25-2012, 01:11 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><span style="color: #3333FF"><span style='font-size: 14pt'>Bank For International Settlements Report: Big Banks Take Risks Expecting Taxpayers To Cover Losses</span> </span> </div></div>



<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The report also emphasized the need to increase the safety of the banking system by <u>pushing banks to be responsible for their losses, add to their financial buffers and avoid risky practices.</u> It added that big banks still have an interest in using high-risk debt so-called "leveraging" to magnify any trading gains because they can expect taxpayers to step in and cover their losses if things go bad.

"Big banks continue to have an interest in driving up their leverage without enough regard for the consequences of failure: because of their systemic weight, they expect the public sector to cover the downside, " said BIS. <span style='font-size: 14pt'>"Another worrying sign is that trading, after a brief crisis-induced squeeze, has again become a major source of income for large banks."

"These conditions are moving the financial sector towards the same high risk profile it had before the crisis."</span>

Some of the concerns about banks reflected in the BIS report were highlighted last week by the downgrade of the credit ratings of 15 large banks by Moody's Investors Service. The credit rating agency cited the banks' <u>"significant exposure to the volatility and risk of outsized losses inherent to capital markets activities."</u>

<span style='font-size: 17pt'>News that J.P. Morgan last month suffered a $2 billion trading loss related to a hedging strategy raised similar concerns.</span> </div></div>

Basically they don't give a rats a$$ and the mayhem and the suffering they have caused with their gambling with other peoples money goes right over their head.

Now they have a get out of jail card and they are determined to use it.

Q......... disgusting low life (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/24/bank-for-international-settlements-report_n_1622244.html?utm_hp_ref=business&utm_hp_ref=business)

Gayle in MD
06-25-2012, 07:49 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><span style="color: #3333FF"><span style='font-size: 14pt'>Bank For International Settlements Report: Big Banks Take Risks Expecting Taxpayers To Cover Losses</span> </span> </div></div>



<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The report also emphasized the need to increase the safety of the banking system by <u>pushing banks to be responsible for their losses, add to their financial buffers and avoid risky practices.</u> It added that big banks still have an interest in using high-risk debt so-called "leveraging" to magnify any trading gains because they can expect taxpayers to step in and cover their losses if things go bad.

"Big banks continue to have an interest in driving up their leverage without enough regard for the consequences of failure: because of their systemic weight, they expect the public sector to cover the downside, " said BIS. <span style='font-size: 14pt'>"Another worrying sign is that trading, after a brief crisis-induced squeeze, has again become a major source of income for large banks."

"These conditions are moving the financial sector towards the same high risk profile it had before the crisis."</span>

Some of the concerns about banks reflected in the BIS report were highlighted last week by the downgrade of the credit ratings of 15 large banks by Moody's Investors Service. The credit rating agency cited the banks' <u>"significant exposure to the volatility and risk of outsized losses inherent to capital markets activities."</u>

<span style='font-size: 17pt'>News that J.P. Morgan last month suffered a $2 billion trading loss related to a hedging strategy raised similar concerns.</span> </div></div>

Basically they don't give a rats a$$ and the mayhem and the suffering they have caused with their gambling with other peoples money goes right over their head.

Now they have a get out of jail card and they are determined to use it.

Q......... disgusting low life (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/24/bank-for-international-settlements-report_n_1622244.html?utm_hp_ref=business&utm_hp_ref=business) </div></div>

And which party has blocked tighter regulations against the financial industry's, grand theft and corruption?

G.

Soflasnapper
06-25-2012, 10:00 AM
And which party has blocked tighter regulations against the financial industry's, grand theft and corruption?

Unfortunately, that would be both parties.

The GOP by vast majorities, and the Dems by some minority faction that is equally the handmaiden of such powerful financial forces.

Sure, the Dems MAINLY support the regulations. But as weakened, lessened, as required in compromise to get their own balking members to join up. Hence the disappointment on the left and the good government side at how much the measures that got passed did not actually do the whole job as they saw required.

Would the Dems be able to get as many in their caucus to actually support the legislation if it had been as robust and far-reaching as many say it must be? We do not know. But probably not. They only get to whatever they get to (80%? 90%?) WHEN THE BILL IS WATERED DOWN in favor of the desires and what the banks and Wall Street PAY to get.

Clearly, the smaller group of Dems who oppose the Democratic Party's positions are ALSO a big impediment to passing these things, especially given the 60 vote requirement newly enshrined as the standard Senate situation. If we do not recognize the compromises forced upon the Dems by a Ben Nelson or Joe Lieberman or Chris Dodd, then a lot of what goes on is misunderstood.

Gayle in MD
06-25-2012, 11:26 AM
I don't agree with you on this, my friend. I have seen many efforts by Dems to protect comsumers, and tighten regulations, that Republicans block from ever even getting to the floor!

The Republicans have by far, been the most obstructionistic regarding taking any actions on reforms and tighter regulations.

I have seen it over and over again, live, on c-span.

G.

Soflasnapper
06-25-2012, 12:29 PM
The Democratic wing of the Democratic Party, the liberals, and the left, have all decried the compromises and shortfalls of Dodd/Frank, and etc. Some have gone so far as to say they were not even worth passing, given how watered down they were, and considering they did not touch many grave issues such as too big to fail.

Personally, I've tried to learn the lesson of not making the perfect the enemy of the good, as perfection can rarely be found in legislation. There will always be compromises, and if you can get half a loaf, take it, and then work on the rest after the half a loaf is secured. So I do not discount the value of what has been done, even if it falls short. But make no mistake, these bills have fallen far short of ideal, even if they got all that could be gotten.

However, part of the reason this was all that could be gotten (if that's even true) is that on almost any and all issues, we have dissent in our own Democratic Party ranks from the DP policies. I'm sure you recall the Blue Dogs, and how they fractured even the large House majority. It's worse in the Senate, as the numbers are still tighter.

We just saw Cory Booker and Bill Clinton, who are otherwise in good standing in the party mainstream, step all over the Bain attack line, even as they then walked it back after the damage was done.

We had Mary Landrieu personally forcing a Senate 'hold' (perhaps in secret at the time), to prevent a necessary appointment going forward for some extortionate demand as to something she wanted. In that, she simply takes the John Breaux position, as a nominal Democratic senator from LA who nonetheless is quite hostile to much of the Democratic agenda.

It is impossible to understand the failures (in some cases, partial failures in others) of the Democrats' policy agenda without considering the Blue Dogs, the Democratic Leadership Committee (DLC) business-friendly types. A house divided against itself cannot stand, as Lincoln quoted Jesus' saying.

Part of it is the 50-state strategy that DNC chairman Howard Dean pushed, which I still think is a sound tactic. However, to get an alleged Democrat elected in red territories requires a Blue Dog type of Democrat, and they, in keeping with both the electorate they represent and their future electoral prospects, are going to vote against the party majority position frequently and at awkward times.

Gayle in MD
06-25-2012, 01:36 PM
Believe me when I tell you, I have cussed at those Blue Dog Dems, from my sofa, that is, /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif as much as I have cussed at the Repigs.

Can't stand Mary Landrieu! Call her office all the time and complain about her lack of concern for the ecology.

But I also contend, that Dems are the only ones who have tried to protect civil rights, tried to increase oversight and regulations, on corrupt corporate and banking practices, and tried to compromise for the sake of the country.

Now that's a large statement, I realize, but I don't think it is unfair.

Given that Republicans have had an attitude of NO COMPROMISES AT ALL, both in their time of minority, and even worse, during this majority, and how often they block allowing anything to even get to the floor, I believe they are far worse, in fact, far, far worse!

In fact, they are no good!

In fact, they are rotten through and through!

In fact....yeah! They are the originating source of all of our problems! Oh Yeah! PIGS!

/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif

Qtec
06-26-2012, 12:13 AM
True. For them to get what they want, they only have to bribe a few Dems because the whole GOP does their bidding, always.
As an Euro looking in from the outside,there are very few US politicians who I think are genuine. Most are in it for themselves. Those who are genuine are predominately Democrat.

A genuine guy. You tell them Anthony. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&NR=1&v=7AG0ddWf9TQ)

Also good. link (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ijmgZGtvkxg)


Q

Qtec
06-26-2012, 12:46 AM
Another good one that shows the absurdity of the right.

Q........on the very first day, the GOP break their own rules!!!! point of order (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y0AQ5TjsEIM&feature=relmfu)

Soflasnapper
06-26-2012, 11:19 AM
With even Elizabeth Warren, peace be unto her!, calling for uncalled for reprisals on Iran, we have major problems with both parties on the most critical policy areas.

A two-headed monster, one corporate/war party of the MIC/financial/media sector with two wings, we cannot happy talk and whistle past the graveyard because some of our party take better domestic policy positions. When it really counts, the Wellstones and Kucinichs who get the whole picture are on the fringe, a too-small minority. Think back to the sole 2 votes against the Gulf of Tonkin resolution, and I'm proud to mention our own Wayne Morse from Oregon as one of them.

Gayle in MD
06-26-2012, 04:33 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">With even Elizabeth Warren, peace be unto her!, calling for uncalled for reprisals on Iran, we have major problems with both parties on the most critical policy areas.

A two-headed monster, one corporate/war party of the MIC/financial/media sector with two wings, we cannot happy talk and whistle past the graveyard because some of our party take better domestic policy positions. When it really counts, the Wellstones and Kucinichs who get the whole picture are on the fringe, a too-small minority. Think back to the sole 2 votes against the Gulf of Tonkin resolution, and I'm proud to mention our own Wayne Morse from Oregon as one of them. </div></div>

Believe me, I get what you're saying.

I know of no solution. I do believe that we have SOME people in this country who fail to research, and/or refuse to believe what has been proven. Far too many who never search, or even try to track down the truth. I believe that pure ignorance, is at the root of our problems.

But whistle? /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/whistle.gif Me? LOL...

As I have said many times, I prefer Dems, and for a lot of very good reasons. Doesn't mean that I think all Dems are perfect, just far, far better than Repigs.

I actually think that in about eight more years, or so, after our emergency situation with climate change is no longer even remotely deniable, we may finally have a viable third party, and it will more than likely be The Green Party.

By then, our irratic weather, fires, floods, hurricanes, tornadoes, etc., etc., will have become far more prevalent.

Additionally, people will not be able to deny the reality of so many more mentally damaged babies being born. There will be so many with multiple health problems, after years of being poisoned by the pollutants from the Fracking industry, from the corrupt coal and oil industries.

We are seeing it happne right now, in the valleys where chopped off mountain tops drain coal and fracking pollution down hill to the poor, unfortunate who must live where they are.

The statistics now on brain damaged new borns, are already alarming, and already being reported, as we write.

More illness, and more deaths, eventually, people will have to take notice, the statistics will demand it, and after they, and their children are sick enough, I believe the third party will emerge, and it will be chock full of scientists, and people like myself, tree huggers, as they call us, who read books, lol...

So I still have hope. Hope that greed and inhumanity, pure negligence, the massive thuggery of the energy corporations, will all combine to eventually bring about a resonating, reverberating, collective SCREAM to save ourselves, and the planet. It has to happen, in time, unfortunatly, in time, but not in time enough for many of us.

That is when I believe we will see a huge revolution in this country.

When it comes, it will be the end of Republicanism, at last.

Big money and Fux Noise, will no longer be able to brainwash willing people, nor assuage their pressing needs to hate, as they scramble for clean water to drink, clean food to eat, clean air to breath, without coughing their heads off, and as they look across the room at their brain damaged children, and grand children, and there will be far too many to deny, by then, we just might finally, really see change, here and around the world.

G.

Soflasnapper
06-26-2012, 06:46 PM
As I have said many times, I prefer Dems, and for a lot of very good reasons. Doesn't mean that I think all Dems are perfect, just far, far better than Repigs.

My feelings as well. Bill Maher puts it, 'vote for us Democrats. We're lame, but the other side is batsh!t crazy!'

By then, our irratic weather, fires, floods, hurricanes, tornadoes, etc., etc., will have become far more prevalent.

It's already happened. Despite the fierce and fairly effective propaganda against the AGW theory, more and more people poll as knowing the weather has been extreme, and are more believing the AGW theory explains why. Something about believing their own damn eyes, instead of Lord Monckton's phony erudition crap.

But there can be no changing the country's mind if we proceed to exit down the 3rd world war door, as apparently the more insane Dominionists and maybe Zionists or those behind them, and maybe Mormons as well, think we should do, and soon.

Avoiding that war is the greatest challenge in the immediate future. It is a wholly sufficient reason to vote against Romney, based on what he's been saying on the issue.

Gayle in MD
06-26-2012, 07:42 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">But there can be no changing the country's mind if we proceed to exit down the 3rd world war door, as apparently the more insane Dominionists and maybe Zionists or those behind them, and maybe Mormons as well, think we should do, and soon.

Avoiding that war is the greatest challenge in the immediate future. It is a wholly sufficient reason to vote against Romney, based on what he's been saying on the issue. </div></div>


OMG! Absolutely! Romney is nuts, just like the rest of them.

And you are so right, the global warming threat is closing in on us at a very accelerated pace. I can only read about it on my really good days, it upsets me so much.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> My feelings as well. Bill Maher puts it, 'vote for us Democrats. We're lame, but the other side is batsh!t crazy!'

</div></div>

/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif

Love Bill Maher! I credit him for helping me get through the last twenty years!


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Something about believing their own damn eyes, instead of Lord Monckton's phony erudition crap.

</div></div>


HA HA HA HA!

Like Kirk Douglas said on Maher's show...too damned much religion!

/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif